Anyone got the deep pockets for a Judicial Review? GG?
I fear, the FOS has sided favourably with Motability here! The likelyhood of a disabled customer challenging the ruling, is for obvious reasons unlikely to happen. The contract wording, was changed c. late July early August 2025 and new leases after this date, all reference to extensions was removed, possibley due to FSO advisement?
However, no matter how we look at it, its a poor show on Motability’s behalf! Simple “advisements” pointing towards the hire term “could be extended for a further two years in this case, its advisable businesses amend the contract to reflect the said changes and get both parties to agree. Motability in this case didn’t even have the common coutesy to ping a message or email to its customers advising of the changes and what to do if you didn’t agree, rather Motablity just placed a notice on their website, that not everyone looks at, nor did they advise what to do, if you didn’t agree with the new terms.
Without looking at the ruling till later, was it the case Motability ended the agreement because, the customer wished for that out come or was it because, the customer had the audacity to complan to the FSO?
Not, as any of this affects me, as it’s doubtful , I’ll see my current lease out.
Thanks @BigDave